Gardaí investigate alleged perjury involving couple in Conor McGregor civil rape case appeal
Garda National Bureau of Crime Investigation
is carrying out an investigation into allegations of perjury involving a couple who were named as witnesses in a failed civil court rape
appeal
by
Conor McGregor
.
Nikita Hand
sued the MMA fighter in the High Court last year.
Ms Hand (35) accused Mr McGregor of raping her in the Beacon Hotel penthouse suite in Dublin on December 9th, 2018.
Mr McGregor (36) denied the allegation, claiming they had consensual, 'vigorous' sex.
READ MORE
However, a civil jury found he had assaulted Ms Hand and
awarded her €248,603
in damages. Mr McGregor immediately launched an appeal.
Mr McGregor had sought to introduce fresh evidence for his appeal which he said bolstered his insistence he was not responsible for bruising on the body of Ms Hand noted by a doctor who examined her on December 10th, 2018.
The evidence included affidavits from Samantha O'Reilly and Steven Cummins, who lived across the road from Ms Hand in Drimnagh in late 2018.
In an affidavit sworn last January, Ms O'Reilly claimed she had witnessed, from her home, a physical altercation between Ms Hand and her then partner Stephen Redmond in their home on the night of December 9th/10th, 2018.
In an affidavit, Ms Hand described her neighbours' claims as lies and said Mr Redmond never assaulted her that night or at any time during their relationship.
[
'I know what happened in that room': the full story of the Conor McGregor case
Opens in new window
]
An application to admit the neighbours' evidence was dramatically withdrawn by Mr McGregor's side at the outset of the appeal. Ms Hand's lawyers applied last month to have the matter referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for consideration of possible perjury, including possible induced perjury by Mr McGregor.
Gardaí confirmed on Saturday that 'following correspondence from the DPP relating to a recent court case, the Garda National Bureau of Crime Investigation is carrying out an investigation.'
A senior investigating officer has been appointed to the investigation.
A person who gives a false sworn statement and knows it to be so, is committing an act of perjury.
Mr McGregor's appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal late last month.
Ms Hand, who has been granted legal costs estimated at €1.3 million, is now suing Mr McGregor, Ms O'Reilly and Mr Cummins for damages.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Independent
2 minutes ago
- Irish Independent
Coast Guard helicopter launched after reports of swimmer in difficulty in Tramore, Co. Waterford
Locals reported a swimmer in difficulty offshore near Boatstrand on Thursday morning with Coast Guard, RNLI, Garda and HSE paramedic units deployed. The Waterford-based Coast Guard helicopter Rescue 117 was launched and conducted sweeps of the sea off Boatstrand. Also launched was the Tramore-based RNLI lifeboat. The search effort remains ongoing. The operation came after drownings in Ireland soared by 10pc compared to 2024 levels. The latest tragedy occurred in Kerry where a young man died after getting into difficulty swimming on Tuesday. Padraig O'Rahilly (24) from Glenflesk outside Killarney died when he got into difficulty while swimming in the River Flesk on Tuesday afternoon.
RTÉ News
2 minutes ago
- RTÉ News
Man deported from Ireland wins appeal to apply for international protection again
A man who was deported from Ireland to Nigeria earlier this summer has been granted leave to return to Ireland to look again for international protection, effectively overturning his deportation order. The man, in his 30s, had been working at a chicken farm in Co Cavan and arrested for deportation in May. He was on one of the three Government deportation flights this year and taken to Lagos in Nigeria. He said he faced persecution in Nigeria and threats to his life because he is gay. In Nigeria, same-sex sexual activity is punishable by up to 14 years in prision. However, as first reported by The he has been granted another opportunity to receive internation protection following a decision by the International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT). Speaking to RTÉ's Morning Ireland on the condition of anonymity, the man described his experience being deported. He said: "They did not take me to the deportation centre, they took me to the prison so it was a very, very bad experience there. "They asked me if I knew where I was going and I said no. They said I'm going to Lagos (Nigerian capital), so I said why, what is my offence? "They said it's not their just doing their job, so they took us to the airport. "The situation (in Nigeria) is very, very critical. If I want to go outside I have to wear a hoody and cover my face using a face mask. It's a very, very bad experience for me, honestly." Solicitor with Dublin-based firm Ferry Solicitors Ana Milward said the International Protection Office (IPO) had rejected his application. However, IPAT accepted a police document saying he was wanted by the Nigerian authorities as new evidence and set aside the decision, allowing him to return to Ireland to apply for international protection again. However, he now has just ten working days to register. Ms Milward told the same programme: "The IPO said his subsequent application was the exact same as the first one, but the tribunal member said that it was accepting the police report as new evidence and they were recommending that the Minister for Justice should grant him the opportunity to again make an application for international protection. "At the moment he's trying to come back to Ireland because he will need to apply for the visa first. I've been in touch with the Department of Justice to see if they can give him an extention of time to register with the only has ten days." In a statement, the Department of Justice said it does not comment on individual cases. However, it highlighted that "acceptance of such an appeal by IPAT does not mean that the applicant has been successful in being granted international protection".
Irish Times
13 hours ago
- Irish Times
Airport security man demoted for kissing colleague should get job back, says WRC
Airport chiefs have been urged to give a security worker his old job as a supervisor back after he was demoted for kissing a subordinate while they were at work together on a screening line two summers ago. The decision to demote the worker from airport search supervisor to a junior position on the airport search unit was 'excessive', a Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) adjudicator decided in a non-binding recommendation under the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The tribunal heard the supervisor had more than five years' service on the airport search unit, screening passengers and baggage, with two years as supervisor, when he was placed under investigation in September 2023 and suspended. The employer said it considered the complainant to have committed gross misconduct by 'kissing a colleague during active operational duties' on the two days before his suspension. READ MORE The other worker, a more junior airport search unit officer, had been operating an x-ray machine on one occasion, and was working in a 'premium services area' under the supervisor on the other occasion. The outcome of the disciplinary process was that the complainant was demoted from his €46,000 a year supervisor post and placed on a final written warning. The decision reflected the 'safety-critical nature of the breaches, the worker's leadership responsibilities and the need to preserve the integrity of security operations', the employer submitted. The disciplinary officer's view was that the kissing 'had the potential to compromise both safety and the employer's reputation'. The demotion and warning were upheld on appeal, an internal appeals officer taking the view that the sanction was 'consistent with those issued in comparable cases', the tribunal heard. Joseph Ateb of the Siptu Workers' Rights Centre, who appeared for the worker, said his client had appealed the decision as being 'excessively harsh' and contended that his previous good record in employment was not given due consideration. The final written warning had expired by the time the WRC heard the case, leaving only the demotion as an issue, the tribunal noted. Adjudicator Breiffni O'Neill wrote that the employer's decision not to consider transferring the supervisor to another department 'calls into question the true extent of the safety concerns'. 'This inconsistency undermines the credibility of the employer's rationale and suggests a lack of proportionality,' he wrote. 'In light of the worker's unblemished prior record, his acceptance of responsibility and the employer's failure to consider a less punitive and reasonable alternative, I find that the additional sanction of demotion was excessive,' Mr O'Neill wrote. His recommendation on the dispute was that the demotion be rescinded and that the worker be reinstated as a supervisor 'with full restoration of duties and remuneration' within a week. The recommendation was published without the names of either the worker or his employer, in line with the WRC's usual practice under the Industrial Relations Act's voluntary arbitration process.
